Polar Ice sets new minimum

[Mr Sleet]

I think they are just being cautious, having reported the record broken prematurely, another week and they will report the new record, when the ice starts to show definite declines in some areas.

Official now, new SH ice area record 16.17 msqkm.

[Gray-Wolf]

All may not be as it seems with the 'ice extent' record. Over the period it hit it's maximum extent I have been posting images of the 'fragmented' nature of the pack as it starts it's summer ablation.

Because MODIS holds images for a month you can check back over the last month and compare (as I have done) 'Cryosphere Todays' Antarctic ice extent images against the reality on the ground (or Ocean if you wish to be pedantic) and see the great difference between their % coverage and actual coverage.

You will quickly realise that the sensitivity of their measure does not reflect the total coverage of ice over an area but also that the 'spaces' between flows, and the winds blowing off the Continent, have pushed much of the shattered ice outward towards the Southern oceans (thus pushing the 'outer edge' of the ice extent further North than is customary).

From where I sit I have to wonder at the processes that enabled this widescale fragmentation of the ice pack (from fringe to coastline) so early in the 'melt' season. It seems quite logical to me that thicker floes would fare better (melt slower) than thinner ice and so this 'early fragmentation' has allowed the ice to drift out further into the Southern Oceans than it has done on previous years and allow this anomalous 'record' to occur.

In reality I see a continuation of the extremes of the Northern Polar melt here in Antarctica and expect, now the 'fridge door' that is the fringing ice pack is well and truely open, to see more reports of rapid calving of the glaciers around the Peninsula and further fragmentation of the remaining ice shelves (including Ross) over this southern summer.

We need now be mindful of Meltwater outflow from the E.A.I.S. flowing out by Mcmurdo sound (as in previous years) and on into the Southern Oceans (showing a cold water anoms as it is forced up over ocean ridges and continental shelves). The first areas to watch for this occurring will be the waters around New Zealand (see image), firstly over the 'Campbell Plateau'

and then on into the Pacific.

Edited October 2, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[Mr Sleet]

All may not be as it seems with the 'ice extent' record. Over the period it hit it's maximum extent I have been posting images of the 'fragmented' nature of the pack as it starts it's summer ablation.

Because MODIS holds images for a month you can check back over the last month and compare (as I have done) 'Cryosphere Todays' Antarctic ice extent images against the reality on the ground (or Ocean if you wish to be pedantic) and see the great difference between their % coverage and actual coverage.

You will quickly realise that the sensitivity of their measure does not reflect the total coverage of ice over an area but also that the 'spaces' between flows, and the winds blowing off the Continent, have pushed much of the shattered ice outward towards the Southern oceans (thus pushing the 'outer edge' of the ice extent further North than is customary).

From where I sit I have to wonder at the processes that enabled this widescale fragmentation of the ice pack (from fringe to coastline) so early in the 'melt' season. It seems quite logical to me that thicker floes would fare better (melt slower) than thinner ice and so this 'early fragmentation' has allowed the ice to drift out further into the Southern Oceans than it has done on previous years and allow this anomalous 'record' to occur.

In reality I see a continuation of the extremes of the Northern Polar melt here in Antarctica and expect, now the 'fridge door' that is the fringing ice pack is well and truely open, to see more reports of rapid calving of the glaciers around the Peninsula and further fragmentation of the remaining ice shelves (including Ross) over this southern summer.

We need now be mindful of Meltwater outflow from the E.A.I.S. flowing out by Mcmurdo sound (as in previous years) and on into the Southern Oceans (showing a cold water anoms as it is forced up over ocean ridges and continental shelves). The first areas to watch for this occurring will be the waters around New Zealand (see image), firstly over the 'Campbell Plateau'

Hi GW. I respect your anaysis but a record is a record. SST's have been well below average down there this winter as have air temps so it is not surprising that there has been more ice formation.

Besides it's ice area, not extent.

Edited October 2, 2007 by Mr Sleet

[Gray-Wolf]

Hi GW. I respect your analysis but a record is a record. SST's have been well below average down there this winter as have air temps so it is not surprising that there has been more ice formation.

Besides it's ice area, not extent.

And as Mr MacAyeal said both the grid that they (U.S. Survey team) and the map 'masks' are not as they may be and you would suspect that their gear is more reliable than other 'bodies'. I shall certainly be awaiting the NASA appraisal of both ice 'extent' and ice area (though , like the upland melt in 2005 it'll probably take 2 yrs for it to trickle down to the likes of us!).

As posted before 2m temps don't mean diddly when the SST's are in the plus's (as that is where sea ice forms, not 2m above). As a guide go and find when sea ice formed around our coastal areas and what the 2m temps were at the coasts over the 2 weeks that led to the ice formation.

So far as ice formation is concerned if sept 16th is the date For max. ice formation I suggest you do look at the MODIS images for the 2 weeks leading up to that date and then tell me again that you have seen 'ice formation', you will find only drift and ablation.

Records are only records when verified so let's not jump the gun eh?

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

This year Antarctic sea ice is of greater area and - tellingly - thickness than previous years.

Here is a comparison of the ice from October 2, 2006 and 2007.

2006

2007

The bright streak in the 2006 image was caused by positive air temperatures. Sea ice starts to melt when the air temperature gets warm enough.

2007 has been an exceptional year for sea ice formation around Antarctica.

Edited October 2, 2007 by AtlanticFlamethrower

[Mr Sleet]

And as Mr MacAyeal said both the grid that they (U.S. Survey team) and the map 'masks' are not as they may be and you would suspect that their gear is more reliable than other 'bodies'. I shall certainly be awaiting the NASA appraisal of both ice 'extent' and ice area (though , like the upland melt in 2005 it'll probably take 2 yrs for it to trickle down to the likes of us!).

As posted before 2m temps don't mean diddly when the SST's are in the plus's (as that is where sea ice forms, not 2m above). As a guide go and find when sea ice formed around our coastal areas and what the 2m temps were at the coasts over the 2 weeks that led to the ice formation.

So far as ice formation is concerned if sept 16th is the date For max. ice formation I suggest you do look at the MODIS images for the 2 weeks leading up to that date and then tell me again that you have seen 'ice formation', you will find only drift and ablation.

Records are only records when verified so let's not jump the gun eh?

I can see that there will be no convincing you then !

[Gray-Wolf]

Am I wasting my time pawing over countless images to find the clearest , unequivocal, indications (for there are many more with sea smoke,low but transparent Stratos, fog......in fact all the weather types you'd associate with a rapidly melting snow cover here in the U.K.) to illustrate how woefully short of reality the low resolution, none visible spectra, wide grid, poor land mask info fed to Joe public is only for you guys to pull up the meaningless (in the context of the images) low resolution tripe? I could easily sit back and rely on some site or other to tell me what is going on but why would I be so Lazy when I can look myself at the state of play less than 4 hrs ago???

If you are content enough, within your lives, to accept second best in an area fast becoming the most crucial issue on the planet (as the effort to actually look and see actual images is too great a burden to apply yourselves to) then so be it but do not attempt to tell me black is white when I can SEE all too well that it is BLACK.

I'm becoming bone tired of being told (by folk who assure me they know better) stats and data that are rapidly becoming superseded by events on the ground. No melt of Antarctic highlands, no bottom freshening of the waters surrounding Antarctica, No basal melt and pneumatic erosion beneath E.A.I.S., no worrying ice tremors to the rear of Ross, no nothing. Keep your blankets well over your head guys, nothing to see here if you don't care to LOOK.......

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Gray-Wolf,

This year's low resolution tripe is particularly exceptional low resolution tripe.

I suspect if you compare high resolution visual images of Antarctic sea ice from pervious years - not just the sea ice by the coast, all of it - that would show why this year is a huge positive anomaly.

[ribster]

Am I wasting my time pawing over countless images to find the clearest , unequivocal, indications (for there are many more with sea smoke,low but transparent Stratos, fog......in fact all the weather types you'd associate with a rapidly melting snow cover here in the U.K.) to illustrate how woefully short of reality the low resolution, none visible spectra, wide grid, poor land mask info fed to Joe public is only for you guys to pull up the meaningless (in the context of the images) low resolution tripe? I could easily sit back and rely on some site or other to tell me what is going on but why would I be so Lazy when I can look myself at the state of play less than 4 hrs ago???

If you are content enough, within your lives, to accept second best in an area fast becoming the most crucial issue on the planet (as the effort to actually look and see actual images is too great a burden to apply yourselves to) then so be it but do not attempt to tell me black is white when I can SEE all too well that it is BLACK.

I'm becoming bone tired of being told (by folk who assure me they know better) stats and data that are rapidly becoming superseded by events on the ground. No melt of Antarctic highlands, no bottom freshening of the waters surrounding Antarctica, No basal melt and pneumatic erosion beneath E.A.I.S., no worrying ice tremors to the rear of Ross, no nothing. Keep your blankets well over your head guys, nothing to see here if you don't care to LOOK.......

There endeth the lesson! ....and people wonder why I get annoyed

[Chris Knight]

people wonder why I get annoyed

C'mon guys, it's only weather, innit?

[Gray-Wolf]

C'mon guys, it's only weather, innit?

Lol,

Yup, whether we continue as a civilisation or not.

A.F., do you think this is a 'novel' pursuit of mine or do you suspect I've had an interest in seeing, real time, whats been going on down there for a number of years ?(with the LarsenB collapse and the removal of B15 from Ross in 2002)

As I posted, you guys know where to look if you wish to see, first hand, what is occurring down there and if you're content as you are it's your own free choice.

I will keep posting interesting images of this years melt and , of course, I'll be keeping an eye on 'My Crack' over on the 'Mechanical Erosion' thread on Environment the rest is up to you guys, you know how I feel and "I told you so's" are not my style.

[Mr Sleet]

Am I wasting my time pawing over countless images to find the clearest , unequivocal, indications (for there are many more with sea smoke,low but transparent Stratos, fog......in fact all the weather types you'd associate with a rapidly melting snow cover here in the U.K.) to illustrate how woefully short of reality the low resolution, none visible spectra, wide grid, poor land mask info fed to Joe public is only for you guys to pull up the meaningless (in the context of the images) low resolution tripe? I could easily sit back and rely on some site or other to tell me what is going on but why would I be so Lazy when I can look myself at the state of play less than 4 hrs ago???

If you are content enough, within your lives, to accept second best in an area fast becoming the most crucial issue on the planet (as the effort to actually look and see actual images is too great a burden to apply yourselves to) then so be it but do not attempt to tell me black is white when I can SEE all too well that it is BLACK.

I'm becoming bone tired of being told (by folk who assure me they know better) stats and data that are rapidly becoming superseded by events on the ground. No melt of Antarctic highlands, no bottom freshening of the waters surrounding Antarctica, No basal melt and pneumatic erosion beneath E.A.I.S., no worrying ice tremors to the rear of Ross, no nothing. Keep your blankets well over your head guys, nothing to see here if you don't care to LOOK.......

They are using the same method in 2007 as they used in 2006 so the comparison that AFT makes is valid.

[Stratos Ferric]

http://environment.independent.co.uk/clima...icle3021309.ece

[Gray-Wolf]

They are using the same method in 2007 as they used in 2006 so the comparison that AFT makes is valid.

Not if, as I have outlined on a number of threads, we are looking at a 'novel' early break up of the single year ice across the Antarctic sea ice.

In case you paid no attention before I'll repeat (again) around Aug 27-30th ice levels (using your measures) started to dip. This was at least 4 weeks before you'd expect to see that event and I commented on it on the 'Mechanical Erosion' thread. Thereafter (against the weather conditions) we saw a rapid 'increase' in ice cover leading to 'Cryosphere Todays' first announcement of a new ice extent record being established (only for them to withdraw the 'record' within the week blaming software glitches) the ice extent continued to increase.

By this time light levels were increasing to the point where meaningful visual inspection of the ice was possible. We were able to see, unlike other years, large disruption to the ice cover and significant melt/drift from the coastal margins (none of which are indicated on the ice extent sites).

I wondered if there was a mechanism that could cause such widescale disruption to the ice pack leading to this early breakup and drift of the pack only to note the full moon at the end of Aug (and the tidal surges associated with it) which coincided with the 'restart' of ice growth perfectly. I then postulated as to the novel situation of the Antarctic at present with the reduction in protecting shelf ice and the growth in single year ice coupled with the declination of the moon at present had lead to catastrophic disruption of the pack and it's early drift outward from the continental margins.

If ice had been 'growing' over the period surely we'd have seen some 'healing of the cracks/fissures and a re-freeze of the coastal margins. This fairly obviously didn't take place as any visual observations would attest to including the images posted on this thread.

Bring to me visible evidence of this 'rapid ice growth' from Aug 27th to Sept 16th and I'll happily concede my position.

[Gray-Wolf]

Thanks S.F., helps us all to understand just how drastic things were up there this summer. Because we've had such a drab time of it it's easy to ignore the rest of the Northern hemisphere and think it was all as dire! What with European heatwaves, Mediterranean wildfires flooding in Idonesia/Indian subcontinent, Siberian heat et-al makes you wonder eh?

[Essan]

The story is a tad misleading We often have similar anomalies in the UK in summer (ie July 2006), we don't have a very long temp record for the region, and other parts of the arctic are often much warmer (30c not uncommon within the arctic circle). Also, Thule, in N Greenland (slightly further north), doesn't appear to have been any warmer than usual (maxima around 14c) - so the anomalies are not the same everywhere.

Without knowing the context, the story sounds much more significant than it really is.

[debs]

Having read all the posts on this topic, and being a bit of a skeptic about it all being down to GW as opposed to the end of an interglacial period, albeit speeded up by our wasteful ways and lack of consideration, I came across this in the BBC archives...makes for interesting reading. As I'm no expert on Polar Ice melt I'm asking if this could be possible???????

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/467928.stm

All comment greatly appreciated.

TTFN

Debs

[Gray-Wolf]

Not that I am wishing to labour the point but here is an image from yesterday

remember this is 2 weeks into spring down there, at the end of your 'record winter' .Tell me again how you are right about both the record and the 'normality' of this springs ablation down there. Check out your ice extent and ice thickness charts for this area (between 150E and 170E...around the corner from the Ross sea). If I get no replies I'll accept that you are starting to agree with my prognosis.

and here's Scotland (part of) for the purpose of 'scale'

Edited October 3, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

It's a record year for sea ice in Antarctica. Thickness as well as area is up on last year and on many years before, with vast areas retaining 100% concentration where it was perhaps 80% in previous years. This can be observed from satellite records.

There will be local variation which also can be observed on satellite records and on visual images. In some places there will be less ice than there has been in previous years. But, taking Antarctic sea ice overall, it's a record year because the total area of ice has increased on previous years.

I then postulated as to the novel situation of the Antarctic at present with the reduction in protecting shelf ice and the growth in single year ice coupled with the declination of the moon at present had lead to catastrophic disruption of the pack and it's early drift outward from the continental margins.

Your observations are not supported by satellite records. In some places - such as the Antarctic peninsular your observations are correct. However the Antarctic peninsular is only 5% of the total land area of Antarctica. Compared to 2006 I have shown chart after chart where thickness as well as extent is up on previous years right up to the coast.

If ice had been 'growing' over the period surely we'd have seen some 'healing of the cracks/fissures and a re-freeze of the coastal margins. This fairly obviously didn't take place as any visual observations would attest to including the images posted on this thread.

Water usually turns to ice when the air temperature goes below -0c. There may be exceptions for pressure and salinity but on the coast these exceptions don't apply significantly.

For the last few weeks the air temperature around the Antarctic coasts have been well below the level needed to freeze ice.

The cracks you see may have a cause that is not related to warming. I don't think it is sensible to conclude the cracks are due to warming when it is so cold there.

I don't know the cause of your observed fissures but I have suggested the extra weight of ice on the coast this year itself could cause greater disruption on parts of the coast. Although it's not clear this cracking has been observed outside the Peninsular, and on the Peninsular it may be a below average year for ice and an early melt scenario.

There is a lot of Antarctic that is not the Peninsular though. The other 95% presumably is well above average.

[Gray-Wolf]

As you can see A.F. the above image is on the opposite side of Antarctica from the Peninsula. Show me your Extent/Thickness images from this area yesterday and we'll talk.

EDIT: Come on A.F., show me your images (visible spectrum) of your assertations otherwise I'll think it's just a blag.

Edited October 3, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Not that I am wishing to labour the point but here is an image from yesterday

That looks like a lot of ice to me.

There is more ice in the region of the Ross sea than last year. The ice is of greater thickness in the region of the Ross sea than last year. This can be observed from the satellite records below.

The Ross sea is to the East of the Anatarctic "arm" - the Peninsular. Notice the horizontal line of green and yellow in the chart below which represents broken ice.

2006

Compare this area to 2007

If I get no replies I'll accept that you are starting to agree with my prognosis.

and here's Scotland (part of) for the pourpose of 'scale'

Silence does not necessarily mean we automatically agree. It might mean we disagree. Therefore you should not treat silence as if we definitely agree.

[Mr Sleet]

That looks like a lot of ice to me.

There is more ice in the region of the Ross sea than last year. The ice is of greater thickness in the region of the Ross sea than last year. This can be observed from the satellite records below.

The Ross sea is to the East of the Anatarctic "arm" - the Peninsular. Notice the horizontal line of green and yellow in the chart below which represents broken ice.

2006

Compare this area to 2007

Silence does not necessarily mean we automatically agree. It might mean we disagree. Therefore you should not treat silence as if we definitely agree.

There's a lot more ice down there this year, for sure. Sorry Gray Wolf

[Gray-Wolf]

Here's more 'looks like a lot of ice' from the northern end of the Peninsula this A.M.

And more worryingly here is what was fringing Shelf in March of this year (start of the freeze up) from 75E to 85E ( in the area you claim is massively extended) and to my untutored eye it seems to be collapsing. Though I'm sure you'll just see solid ice there as well Mr S.!

EDIT: Again Mr S., A.F. I have asked for visual evidence of your 'Ice thickening' since Aug 27th thru Sept 16th. I can post images of stretches of open water as large as Scotland beyond the great Glen Fault in areas you claim are more extensive than in satellite records and all you can say is "Seems like a lot of ice there" well , Der, I'd love to see you take a walk on that substantially thicker ice!

When the Arctic sea smoke has lifted off the Ross Sea I'll let you have a look at your "Furthest extent recorded" too!!!

I just cannot get where you're coming from at all. Are you looking at what I am posting or is it a case of 'none so blind......?'

Edited October 3, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[AtlanticFlamethrower]

Ice pushes out and collapses all the time. If it didn't they'd be ice all the way to the equator.

Sorry Gray-Wolf. Satellite observations are independent, and give a view of the total ice level all around Antarctica.

The Peninsular is interesting but it's 5% of Antarctica, and one should not focus on it to the exclusion of other areas.

Especially when these areas show frankly incredible ice totals compared to recent years. In fact, the highest recorded ice totals.

BTW the ice record was a few days ago. Don't mess me around and post something next week when the ice situation may be very different. What we need is calmer more impartial posts, like Carithian. If we cannot manage this then I will request this thread be locked.

[Gray-Wolf]

Seems a little sad really and more than a tad deceptive.

Not once in the article was the result on global temps that such Cathrite releases would initiate. The Cathrites are one of the strongest greenhouse gasses on the planet and the temperature increases that would follow such releases would be more than enough to melt the remaining Greenland ice cap and the rest of the West and East Antarctic ice sheets releasing 10s upon 10's more meters of sea level rises. offset by this supposed 1.5m 'saving' of sea level reduction.

Basically it's painting a rosy picture of one of the most dangerous aspects of G.W., the release of the deep sea/shelf Cathrites. It is my understanding that most efforts to 'peg' temps are pegged below the temp. that we currently feel would start The Cathrite release.

It's bad enough to have to factor in the methane currently seeping out of Siberia and Alaska without having to factor in massive Cathrite release.